Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-20-2015, 01:44 PM   #1
Koningkrush
 
Koningkrush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Default Actual Impaling Question

What are the rules for actual impaling? Like, how much damage does an impaling weapon need to do before it actually goes straight through the body and stops dealing damage? The same question goes for the different levels of piercing damage.

I'm assuming cutting damage has a 6x HP damage limit or something since being cut clean in half would be almost certain instant death while crushing has no limit since you would be practically exploding after a certain point of force.
Koningkrush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2015, 01:59 PM   #2
Bruno
 
Bruno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

What you're looking for is the "Overpenetration" rules. Basic Set 408. Further stuff related to weapons going through people on High Tech p 162. I'm pretty sure there's something else I'm missing - possibly in Martial Arts.
__________________
All about Size Modifier; Grand Unified Hit Location Table
A Wiki for my F2F Group
Bruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2015, 02:01 PM   #3
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyv, Ukraine
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

Overpenetration is on B408.
Optional rules for blowthrough no longer causing direct damage is on HT162.
Impaling (and keeping at bay) a charging foe is on MA106.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
Also, GURPS Discord is a nice place for (faster) Q&A and overall GURPS dicussion.
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2015, 07:09 PM   #4
Koningkrush
 
Koningkrush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

So the rules basically say after 1xHP damage (if using bleeding rules), the weapon/projectile has gone through the body and stops inflicting injury. However, this seems small for impaling/huge piercing and overkill for small piercing. Would it be better for the threshold to be 0.5xHP for small piercing, 1xHP for piercing, 1.5xHP for large piercing, and 2xHP for huge piercing/impaling? The reasoning behind it is that something with a larger diameter should cause a much wider wound canal meaning higher potential injury. This is all for a general torso hit without vitals btw.
Koningkrush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2015, 08:27 PM   #5
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koningkrush View Post
So the rules basically say after 1xHP damage (if using bleeding rules), the weapon/projectile has gone through the body and stops inflicting injury. However, this seems small for impaling/huge piercing and overkill for small piercing. Would it be better for the threshold to be 0.5xHP for small piercing, 1xHP for piercing, 1.5xHP for large piercing, and 2xHP for huge piercing/impaling? The reasoning behind it is that something with a larger diameter should cause a much wider wound canal meaning higher potential injury. This is all for a general torso hit without vitals btw.
Making the 1xHP limit a damage threshold rather than an injury threshold is something I like, yeah.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2015, 09:04 PM   #6
Barghaest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Making the 1xHP limit a damage threshold rather than an injury threshold is something I like, yeah.
Actually, using the Overpenetration rules on B408 that is how it reads. Penetration happens if basic damage exceeds the threshold (meaning not modified for wounding)... so yeah, I see no reason why that shouldn't apply to the HT162 section as well.

EDIT: Quite frankly I don't see why they didn't have rules for getting thrust/imp weapons stuck in your opponent standard (making it a specific damage threshold instead of just the way the section on Picks reads) since with high enough ST it's possible to do as much damage with a thr/imp weapon as a ST 10 person could do with a sw/imp one...

Last edited by Barghaest; 09-20-2015 at 09:12 PM.
Barghaest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2015, 11:47 PM   #7
ericthered
Hero of Democracy
 
ericthered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barghaest View Post
EDIT: Quite frankly I don't see why they didn't have rules for getting thrust/imp weapons stuck in your opponent standard (making it a specific damage threshold instead of just the way the section on Picks reads) since with high enough ST it's possible to do as much damage with a thr/imp weapon as a ST 10 person could do with a sw/imp one...
Its about angles and how you apply force. swinging a pick forward is much more efficient than pulling it backwards. More to the point, when you pull back on the handle, the pick doesn't come strait back, it curves, digging into the skin and generally getting stuck. This is because the force being pulled back is a handle to the side of the injury. A spear or sword is pulled back directly behind the injury, so they come out just fine.
__________________
Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog
ericthered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2015, 11:53 PM   #8
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barghaest View Post
Actually, using the Overpenetration rules on B408 that is how it reads. Penetration happens if basic damage exceeds the threshold (meaning not modified for wounding)... so yeah, I see no reason why that shouldn't apply to the HT162 section as well.
Those are completely different things. Overpenetration is about how much the target's body does to stop your attack from hitting something behind them. That is about damage by definition, because damage is penetration. And mechanically it doesn't have any relevance to the rules on HT162.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2015, 07:22 AM   #9
Rupert
 
Rupert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Making the 1xHP limit a damage threshold rather than an injury threshold is something I like, yeah.
3e had that, mostly, and it had some odd effects. For example, this means that a 7.62x51mm NATO APHC bullet doing 7d pi- would only ever do 10 x 0.5 = 5HP damage to a 1-HP target. Note that this is insufficient to create a major wound or to 'cripple' a limb. So we have the odd effect of AP rounds from full-bore rifles being unable to drop people or even slow them down unless they are shot 2+ times or a hit in a fairly limited number of places, while standard ball rounds (which generally have very similar wound tracks) can.

Back in 3e my rules was 'damage is capped at HP, injury at HP or HP x wound modifier, whichever is higher' to avoid this. It still makes .45 ACP ball noticeably more effective than 9x19mm ball rather than slightly, which is a bit annoying.

I think if I were to introduce a damage cap for piercing and impaling attacks today I'd go with twice the major wound threshold for limbs and extremities, and 2xHP for the torso.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
Rupert is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2015, 09:04 AM   #10
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Actual Impaling Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert View Post
3e had that, mostly, and it had some odd effects. For example, this means that a 7.62x51mm NATO APHC bullet doing 7d pi- would only ever do 10 x 0.5 = 5HP damage to a 1-HP target. Note that this is insufficient to create a major wound or to 'cripple' a limb. So we have the odd effect of AP rounds from full-bore rifles being unable to drop people or even slow them down unless they are shot 2+ times or a hit in a fairly limited number of places, while standard ball rounds (which generally have very similar wound tracks) can.
If ball rounds and AP rounds have very similar wound tracks, then them having wounding factors differing by a factor of two is a problem whether or not it influences a damage cap.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
injury, rules, rules clarification

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.